You're absolutely right. Maybe it's just because I'm so used to the unified design and smooth, universal interface of MacOS, but those screenshots look awful. The interface looks disproportioned and distracting, with no evidence of design unity. Maybe it isn't as bad as it looks, but it looks to me like it would be annoying to the point of being almost unusable.
I like my GUI. Writing a loop requires thinking, even if it doesn't require very much. I don't own a computer so that I can waste all my brain power telling it what to do in precise terms. I own a computer so that it can do some of my thinking for me.
But the point I made was that you personally have not tried Mac OS X and therefore have absolutely no basis for criticism. You think that the placement of some buttons was a bad choice, but haven't actually clicked them.
You must be either an incredible genius who can judge things using only his theories of how they must be, or an ignorant bumkin who thinks he's an incredible genius.
The horrid interface decisions that have gone into Aqua IMOP render it a step back for Apple in terms of their traditional strength
Let me guess, you haven't actually tried OS X, but you feel qualified to make an educated guess that it totally sucks based on reading a description and looking at some pictures.
"Consumers" have always been told that their software shouldn't be copied or modified, so I think it is normal for them to not realize what freedom they get from free software and to base their judgement only on convenience.
So are you basing your argument on the twisted idea that people only want what's convenient because they've been conditioned not to want modified software? That doesn't make sense! Freedom and convenience in a desktop environment should not even be connected.
Even if they were, your argument still makes no sense. For one thing, for every proprietary operating system available there exist numerous third party hacks designed to customize the OS environment. Screen savers, appearance modifiers, utilities, and all manner of other things. Obviously if consumers desire third party customization for a proprietary OS, we're not going to balk at customization in an OS designed for it.
Further, convenience is not something foisted on us that we don't want. Consumers flock to convenience because we like it. People eat at McDonalds and buy supplies at 7/11 because it's convenient to do so. They could get much better quality merchandise somewhere else, but that would take more time. For the same reasons, people like an OS that's already set up for them. Customizability is great, but you shouldn't have to spend time customizing your operating system just to make it usable.
Isn't it just a way of associating names with IPs that DNS doesn't take care of, like with local networks?
That's exactly what it's for. And if you tell it that some address (for instance ln.doubleclick.net) is an IP like 127.0.0.1, every time a web site has an embedded doubleclick tracker it will end up sending data to your computer instead of to doubleclick.
Does it really matter whether or not he worked for a licensing company? The points he raises are valid (to a degree) whether he drew them from his own experience or somewhere else.
Marathon Infinity was essentially just an add-on for Marathon 2. The only really significant engine improvement was the ability to automatically switch monitor resolution so it runs fullscreen. If your LCIII ran Marathon 2, it would run Marathon Infinity.
The "leased life" is just plain more efficient than the old idea of owning things. You live in a rented apartment while you need it, then when you cease to need it you move out and someone else who needs it moves in. Same deal with contract employment; they pay you while they need you, then when you're not needed, you move on to someone else who needs you. Certain things have always been like this. Agricultural workers have always travelled from place to place so as to be there when the crops needed picking and move on when they were picked. But as technology makes both travel and communication much more efficient, this spreads to other areas. Also, as computers and automation allow things to happen faster, the whole world accelerates. Where people used to change jobs once in a lifetime, it now happens every few years. In the IT industry, the closest of all to the new technology, it happens even faster.
The real question is, does it really help? Is all this efficiency really good for the human species? I think so. More efficiency means knowledge advances faster, enabling us to better ourselves. Unfortunately, in the hectic environment of constant optimization, we often lose sight of the longterm and think only about the shortterm. We need to be able to operate in the shortterm while keeping our eyes on longterm, species-wide goals.
I don't know too much about this, but aren't there theories that say "if there's this much mass within this much volume or less, a black hole either exists or will form"?
slowly radiate at a temperature which is inversely proportional to its surface area
I don't know too much about this subject, but it sounds like you're saying that as it absorbs more background radiation and grows larger, its radiation temperature will actually grow cooler? So does that mean that the larger it grows, the less its radiation will counteract its growth so the faster it will grow larger?
Does this mean there are black holes in the center? Not really - even if they could see through the dust cloud a tiny black hole wouldn't be visible
They can't actually prove the existence/non-existence of black holes, but they can determine whether mass exists in a sufficiently small volume in the center of the galaxy to create black holes based on the popular theories. That is, they can say "If the theories are correct, there is a black hole in the center of the galaxy."
Not only do they grow and shrink (thanks to some quantum trickery), but they also aren't black... In fact, the reason we know they exist is that they actually radiate energy. Their methodical evaporation causes flashes of X-rays to pulse out...
Um... I don't know about you, but I can't see X-rays. If I look at something emitting X-rays but no visible light, I say it's black.
But there are so many ways of getting around virus protection software... No matter how current you keep your virus definitions, they're not going to detect a clever virus written yesterday. Sure, a patch will be out to detect it pretty quick, but by that time it might not matter.
There is no compelling reason why they shouldn't suspend or cancel the account of a person who has been targetted in the past for attacks of any kind against the server. It's probably not the best way to handle it, but the ISP is well within its rights. To use an analogy: If you're in a restaurant and some punks come in and get in a loud argument with you, you're probably going to get thrown out along with them. "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone."
Slashdot has always been a champion for the underdog and I hope it stays that way..nothing to do with "groupthink."
Maybe I'm interpreting it wrong, but when you refer to Slashdot are you referring to the body of comment posters who, as a whole, always lean toward the underdog in any conflict? If so, isn't your declaration of detachment from "groupthink" in the next line sort of a contradiction?
Be smart, don't run anything from an untrusted source without checking it first.
Isn't all of Gnutella pretty much an untrusted source?
Also, how would I go about checking a binary file I downloaded to make sure it's what I think it is and not an insidious worm? Size could be a clue sometimes, but not all the time, especially if the programmer is smart and names it to look like appropriately sized binaries. Would virus protection software catch something like this?
Negative moderation could mean either "Yes, you're absolutely right, we're a bunch of elitist geeks who refer to any authority but our own as fascism so shove it up your ass!", or it could mean "No you're just an idiot who doesn't understand."
According to the article (for those too lazy to read it), it was still working fine with 2 out of 3 gyroscopes after the first one failed. They decided to crash it to reduce the risk of debree hitting a person from 1 in 1000 (after the second gyroscope failed and it lost control) to 1 in 29 million.
That seems like kind of a waste to me. I mean, 1 in 1000 doesn't seem so bad to me, odds-wise. And that's only after the second one fails. They probably could have gotten years of service out of it without any problem.
Slashdot Mirror
You're absolutely right. Maybe it's just because I'm so used to the unified design and smooth, universal interface of MacOS, but those screenshots look awful. The interface looks disproportioned and distracting, with no evidence of design unity. Maybe it isn't as bad as it looks, but it looks to me like it would be annoying to the point of being almost unusable.
Ha ha ha! A loop! Good one!
I like my GUI. Writing a loop requires thinking, even if it doesn't require very much. I don't own a computer so that I can waste all my brain power telling it what to do in precise terms. I own a computer so that it can do some of my thinking for me.
But the point I made was that you personally have not tried Mac OS X and therefore have absolutely no basis for criticism. You think that the placement of some buttons was a bad choice, but haven't actually clicked them.
You must be either an incredible genius who can judge things using only his theories of how they must be, or an ignorant bumkin who thinks he's an incredible genius.
The horrid interface decisions that have gone into Aqua IMOP render it a step back for Apple in terms of their traditional strength
Let me guess, you haven't actually tried OS X, but you feel qualified to make an educated guess that it totally sucks based on reading a description and looking at some pictures.
"Consumers" have always been told that their software shouldn't be copied or modified, so I think it is normal for them to not realize what freedom they get from free software and to base their judgement only on convenience.
So are you basing your argument on the twisted idea that people only want what's convenient because they've been conditioned not to want modified software? That doesn't make sense! Freedom and convenience in a desktop environment should not even be connected.
Even if they were, your argument still makes no sense. For one thing, for every proprietary operating system available there exist numerous third party hacks designed to customize the OS environment. Screen savers, appearance modifiers, utilities, and all manner of other things. Obviously if consumers desire third party customization for a proprietary OS, we're not going to balk at customization in an OS designed for it.
Further, convenience is not something foisted on us that we don't want. Consumers flock to convenience because we like it. People eat at McDonalds and buy supplies at 7/11 because it's convenient to do so. They could get much better quality merchandise somewhere else, but that would take more time. For the same reasons, people like an OS that's already set up for them. Customizability is great, but you shouldn't have to spend time customizing your operating system just to make it usable.
Something like that should work, yes.
Isn't it just a way of associating names with IPs that DNS doesn't take care of, like with local networks?
That's exactly what it's for. And if you tell it that some address (for instance ln.doubleclick.net) is an IP like 127.0.0.1, every time a web site has an embedded doubleclick tracker it will end up sending data to your computer instead of to doubleclick.
Does it really matter whether or not he worked for a licensing company? The points he raises are valid (to a degree) whether he drew them from his own experience or somewhere else.
I feel that I should have a right to comment on shows that are in the public domain.
And you do. Their right to prevent unauthorized use of their images and sound clips in no way impinges on your right to comment.
Marathon Infinity was essentially just an add-on for Marathon 2. The only really significant engine improvement was the ability to automatically switch monitor resolution so it runs fullscreen. If your LCIII ran Marathon 2, it would run Marathon Infinity.
A 32Mhz 030 is fine for classic Marathon. It won't be real fast, but it'll be playable. There is a PC version of Marathon 2.
The "leased life" is just plain more efficient than the old idea of owning things. You live in a rented apartment while you need it, then when you cease to need it you move out and someone else who needs it moves in. Same deal with contract employment; they pay you while they need you, then when you're not needed, you move on to someone else who needs you. Certain things have always been like this. Agricultural workers have always travelled from place to place so as to be there when the crops needed picking and move on when they were picked. But as technology makes both travel and communication much more efficient, this spreads to other areas. Also, as computers and automation allow things to happen faster, the whole world accelerates. Where people used to change jobs once in a lifetime, it now happens every few years. In the IT industry, the closest of all to the new technology, it happens even faster.
The real question is, does it really help? Is all this efficiency really good for the human species? I think so. More efficiency means knowledge advances faster, enabling us to better ourselves. Unfortunately, in the hectic environment of constant optimization, we often lose sight of the longterm and think only about the shortterm. We need to be able to operate in the shortterm while keeping our eyes on longterm, species-wide goals.
That makes it real pork, not real ham.
I don't know too much about this, but aren't there theories that say "if there's this much mass within this much volume or less, a black hole either exists or will form"?
slowly radiate at a temperature which is inversely proportional to its surface area
I don't know too much about this subject, but it sounds like you're saying that as it absorbs more background radiation and grows larger, its radiation temperature will actually grow cooler? So does that mean that the larger it grows, the less its radiation will counteract its growth so the faster it will grow larger?
Does this mean there are black holes in the center? Not really - even if they could see through the dust cloud a tiny black hole wouldn't be visible
They can't actually prove the existence/non-existence of black holes, but they can determine whether mass exists in a sufficiently small volume in the center of the galaxy to create black holes based on the popular theories. That is, they can say "If the theories are correct, there is a black hole in the center of the galaxy."
where exactly in hyperspace these could be traced
Maybe I'm ignorant, but what exactly is hyperspace?
Not only do they grow and shrink (thanks to some quantum trickery), but they also aren't black... In fact, the reason we know they exist is that they actually radiate energy. Their methodical evaporation causes flashes of X-rays to pulse out...
Um... I don't know about you, but I can't see X-rays. If I look at something emitting X-rays but no visible light, I say it's black.
Easy to say, but given the nature of a piracy service like Gnutella it might not be so practical.
But there are so many ways of getting around virus protection software... No matter how current you keep your virus definitions, they're not going to detect a clever virus written yesterday. Sure, a patch will be out to detect it pretty quick, but by that time it might not matter.
There is no compelling reason why they shouldn't suspend or cancel the account of a person who has been targetted in the past for attacks of any kind against the server. It's probably not the best way to handle it, but the ISP is well within its rights. To use an analogy: If you're in a restaurant and some punks come in and get in a loud argument with you, you're probably going to get thrown out along with them. "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone."
Slashdot has always been a champion for the underdog and I hope it stays that way..nothing to do with "groupthink."
Maybe I'm interpreting it wrong, but when you refer to Slashdot are you referring to the body of comment posters who, as a whole, always lean toward the underdog in any conflict? If so, isn't your declaration of detachment from "groupthink" in the next line sort of a contradiction?
Be smart, don't run anything from an untrusted source without checking it first.
Isn't all of Gnutella pretty much an untrusted source?
Also, how would I go about checking a binary file I downloaded to make sure it's what I think it is and not an insidious worm? Size could be a clue sometimes, but not all the time, especially if the programmer is smart and names it to look like appropriately sized binaries. Would virus protection software catch something like this?
What answer?
Negative moderation could mean either "Yes, you're absolutely right, we're a bunch of elitist geeks who refer to any authority but our own as fascism so shove it up your ass!", or it could mean "No you're just an idiot who doesn't understand."
According to the article (for those too lazy to read it), it was still working fine with 2 out of 3 gyroscopes after the first one failed. They decided to crash it to reduce the risk of debree hitting a person from 1 in 1000 (after the second gyroscope failed and it lost control) to 1 in 29 million.
That seems like kind of a waste to me. I mean, 1 in 1000 doesn't seem so bad to me, odds-wise. And that's only after the second one fails. They probably could have gotten years of service out of it without any problem.